Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Key v. Keim

June 26, 2007

KENNETH M. KEY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
STEVEN KEIM, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on a Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud. In his Report, Judge Proud recommends that Defendant Steven Keim's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 15), be denied (Doc. 25). The Defendant has filed an objection to the report (Doc. 26).

Plaintiff Kenneth Key, an inmate at the Menard Correctional Center in Illinois, brought this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging the Defendant, while serving as Chaplain at the Menard Correctional Center, violated his First Amendment right to practice his religion. Also, Plaintiff claims Defendant violated these rights when he denied Plaintiff a kosher meal several times in 2003 and 2004. Also, Plaintiff claims Defendant unlawfully denied him access to certain religious tapes.

I. Standard of Review

After being served with a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, a party has 10 days to "[F]ile specific, written objections to the proposed finding and recommendations." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The district judge must review the objected portions de novo. Id. The court reviews the non-objected to portions for clear error only. Id; Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999). "The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended decision, receive further evidence, or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

On a motion for summary judgment, the Court construes all the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and draws all justifiable inferences in favor of that party. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). If no genuine issues as to any material fact exist, the moving party is entitled to summary judgment. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986).

II. The Report's Findings

The Report established the following facts. Plaintiff was at the Menard Correctional Facility from September 25, 2002 to December 28, 2005. He requested and received a vegan diet in October 2002. At that time, Plaintiff was a member of the African Hebrew Israelite faith. On December 30, 2002, he declared himself a member of the House of Yahweh by filling out the required IDOC form. The Plaintiff's complaint alleges he began requesting a kosher diet on February 21, 2003, in writing. Defendant then requested written verification of Plaintiff's membership in a faith group which requires adherence to a particular diet, in accordance with 20 Ill. Admin. Code § 425.70. Plaintiff then submitted a letter dated April 2, 2003 from the home office of the Assemblies of Yahweh stating, "it has become our policy to purchase products with the kosher symbols." During 2003, Plaintiff received kosher trays for the Passover holiday only.

On July 14, 2003, Plaintiff filed a grievance in which he referred to himself as a member of the Hebrew faith and a member of the House of Yahweh. In the grievance, he also complained he was not receiving a kosher diet, which he stated was a "religious obligation." The Chaplain's department indicated the "inmate does not qualify for a kosher diet as he must adhere to a vegan diet."

Defendant says he had information "from the House of Yahweh which stated the Kosher Fare Common diet was not an acceptable diet for members of the House of Yahweh." This letter was from Elder David Heimerman of the House of Yahweh to Chaplain Jones at Dixon, dated August 24, 2003 (Doc. 16, Exhibit 6, attached to Exhibit B). Plaintiff then alleges he requested to change his religion from House of Yahweh to Assemblies of Yahweh on a form dated February 23, 2004, which he submitted through the Defendant's lockbox. Defendant denies that plaintiff ever attempted to change religion to Assemblies of Yahweh.

Plaintiff also alleges the Defendant denied him permission to possess religious tapes mailed by Reverend Douglas Mitchell. Plaintiff states the tapes were sent back and not given to him on "Keim's word."

The Report found the Defendant could not have used the letter from House of Yahweh to deny kosher meals before August, because the letter was not dated until August 24, 2003. Additionally, Plaintiff's and Defendant's statements conflict as to whether Plaintiff submitted a writing on February 23, 2004, indicating his change of religion to Assemblies of Yahweh. Also, the Report found the Defendant did not refute he had the religious tapes sent back. Finally, the Report found fact issues that still needed determined, which precluded summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds.

III. Objections and Analysis

The Defendant states specifically in his objection, "Since none of the evidence before this Court shows prior to February 23, 2004, the Defendant was required to have granted the Plaintiff's request for a diet prohibited by his designated religion . . . Defendant's Motion for ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.